Pope Pius IX., Feb. 2, 1849, and the answer of the Prussian bishops in Gelzer's Protest. Monatsblätter, ix. 2, s. 69, sq. The papal decision was prepared for, dogmatically, in particular by the works of Perrone, De immacul. B. Virg. Mariæ Conceptu, and of Passaglia (§ 178). Protestant polemics were also aroused against the doctrine; see Julius Müller (§ 178), and G. A. Wimmer, Ehrenrettung der seligen Jungfrau Maria gegen die päpstlichen Verunglimpfungen, Bremen, 1855. [Comp. Christ. Remembrancer, April, 1852; Methodist Quarterly, April, 1855. Denzinger, Lehre d. unbefleckten Empfängniss, 2d ed., 1855. Bp. Malou (of Bruges), L'immaculée Conception....comme Dogme de Foi, 2 Tomes, Bruxelles, 1857.-Ballerini, Sylloge Monumentorum ad Mysterium Conc. immacul. Virginis, etc., Rom., 1855.]

1

§ 299.

CHRISTOLOGY.

Dorner, über die Entwicklungsgeschichte der Christologie, besonders in neuern Zeiten, Tübinger Zeitschrift, 1835, part 4, p. 81, ss.; Entwicklungsgeschichte der Lehre von der Person Christi, p. 250, ss. Liebner, Christologie, oder die christol. Einheit des dogmat. Systems, i. Gött., 1849. [Thomasius, Christi Person und Werk, 3 Bde. 2te. Aufl., 1859. W. F. Gess, Die Lehre d. Person Christi, 1856. H. G. Hasse, Leben des verklärten Erlösers, 1854. E. W. Grinfield, The Christian Cosmos: the Son of God the revealed Creator, 1856.]

The more the doctrine of the natural depravity of mankind was lost sight of, and the nature of man elevated, the more did specific difference between Jesus of Nazareth and the rest of mankind disappear. Thus Socinianism and Ebionitism were re-introduced into the Church, along with the Pelagian tendencies of the so-called period of illumination.' But there was still a deep interest in considering the human nature of Christ, i. e., his character as a historical person, which was represented sometimes in noble, sometimes in trivial aspects, by different writers.' This led to a new historical estimate of his life,' which was best adapted to prepare the way for the revival of a belief in his higher nature, as surpassing the bounds of humanity. The views of Kant had given rise to an arbitrary distinction, unknown to the doctrine of the church, between an ideal and a historical Christ. Only a small number of pious men (to which belonged some of the most eminent writers of the present period) retained the doctrine of Christ's divinity, with all the ardor of fervent love, amidst a gainsaying generation. Some, e. g., Emmanuel Swedenborg, even went so far as to adopt notions bordering on enthusiasm and heresy. The Christian rationalists declared their belief in the historical Christ (the man Jesus), founded upon the critical interpretation of the accounts given by the evange lists (especially in the so-called synoptical gospels). They differed

most distinctly from the anti-Christian naturalism, in admitting that the founder of the Christian Church must have been possessed of the highest moral perfection, without directly asserting the dogma of the absolute sinlessness of Christ. The better class of the rationalists did not deny that Christ possessed miraculous and mysterious powers with the view of detracting from his honor, but in order to render him more accessible to men, to make his doctrine more intelligible, and his example more profitable.' On the other hand, the adherents of the speculative philosophy exerted themselves to the utmost in the defence of the idea of an incarnate God (which had been rejected by the rationalists), or of the unity of the divine with the human; and they thus exposed themselves to the danger of renouncing the historical manifestation of Christ, or even of converting his history into mere myths. The advocates of modern theology, since Schleiermacher, consider it their task to show, that the divine and the human in Christ (the ideal and the historical), are most intimately connected with each other. Though they widely differ from each other in reference to particular points, as well as in the modes of argumentation which they use,' they all agree in admitting that the received ecclesiastical terms of person and nature are not sufficient to express the real relation." It is also now generally acknowledged, that only more profound philosophical and historical investigations can justify to thinking minds the idea of a God-man, or prove, with the highest degree of historical evidence, that this idea is realised in the person of Jesus of Nazareth."

1 Dorner, Christologie, p. 255.

very differ

* The phrase, “Jesus of Nazareth was a mere man," can be ently interpreted; there are all the grades between an impostor and an enthusiast, between the latter and an extraordinary messenger of God, a prophet, a worker of miracles, and, lastly, the Son of Man, after his resurrection raised to the heavens. All these terms have been applied to Christ (in an inverse order) from the period of Socinianism down to the publication of the "Wolfenbüttler Fragmente," and the "Natürliche Geschichte des Propheten von Nazareth," Bethlehem [Kopenhagen], 1800.

'Bringing the person of Christ into the sphere of history, and the endeavor to understand him like every other man in historical relations, could only in the end be subservient to the advancement of truth (hence the Life of Jesus is now so often described); for the ecclesiastical doctrine of the true humanity of the Redeemer must lose its significance without what may be called the human treatment of his history. In this respect Herder has distinguished himself above all other writers. Comp. his "Christliche Schrif ten," and the passages quoted in his "Dogmatik," p. 134, ss., 190, ss., 212, And yet, while emphasizing what Christ has in common with the race he has overlooked what raises him, as the Holy One, above the race.

89.

In connection with his doctrine of original evil, Kant maintained the necessity of a restoration of man by means of his freedom. To attain unto this end, man stands in need of an ideal—viz., a human ideal which is presented to him in the scriptural doctrine concerning Christ (the personified idea of the good principle). The idea has its seat in our reason; for the practical purposes of an example, etc., a character is sufficient which resembles the idea as much as possible. It is not necessary to suppose a supernatural generation, though it cannot be absolutely denied that such may take place; see Religion innerhalb der Grenzen der blossen Vernunft, p. 67, ss., and comp. p. 183, and Dorner, 1. c. p. 258, ss. "The incongruence between the historical and the ideal Christ is here indeed only hinted at in the most forbearing manner; but in point of fact this want of correspondence between the manifestation and the idea is a fundamental point in the Kantian philosophy;" Strauss, ii. 292.

Zinzendorf and the Society of the United Brethren. Spangenberg Idea Fidei Fratr. § 63-84. Bengel, comp. Burk, p. 353, ss., p. 541. [Comp. Von der Goltz, Die theologische Bedentung Bengels und seiner Schule, in Jahrb. f. deutsche Theologie, 1861, pp. 460-507.] Oetinger (comp. Dorner, 1. c. p. 305, ss.) Haller, Gellert, J. C. Lavater, Hamann (Dorner, p. 305), Stilling, Claudius, Klopstock, Novalis (Dorner, p. 323, ss.) Respecting Lavater, see the biographies by Herbst, Gessner, and others: Hegner (Beiträge, Lpz., 1836), p. 260, ss. "My grey hair shall not descend into the grave, until I have addressed these words to some of the elect: He is more certain than I am" (Handbibel, 1791). "The divinity of Christ, this su preme power in heaven and on earth, was in all its aspects the only theme which he everywhere announced, taught in his writings, and treated at length;" Hegner, p. 267. Comp. on the other hand, the remarkable letters. of Göthe addressed to Lavater in the year 1781, pp. 140, 141.

• The christology of Swedenborg bears close resemblance to that of Swenckfeld. Jesus is born of the Holy Ghost and of Mary. Inasmuch as his divinity is the divinity of the Father, his body was also divine. That which was human was made divine by sufferings and temptations. The human which he received from Mary was gradually laid aside, and the heavenly divine body substituted for it. It is the divine body which he took with him to heaven. (Comp. his views concerning the Trinity, § 292; Dorner, p. 208, note.)-On Oetinger's Christology, see "Theologie aus der Idee des Lebens," p. 245, sq.; Auberlen, pp. 152, 163, 231, 239, sq., and other passages.

7

Röhr, Briefe über den Rationalismus, xi., and Christologische Predigten, Weimar, 1831. Wegscheider, Institutiones, § 123, 128. Paulus, das Leben Jesu.-Dorner, 1. c. pp. 278, 279. (Rationalists speak only of a doctrina Christi, but not of a doctrina de Christo.)-On the controversy respecting the adoration of Christ, which was carried on in Magdeburg in the year 1840, see Hase, Church History, New York ed., p. 565.

8

On the origin of these speculative views of Christ's nature as traced to the works of Spinoza, see Štrauss, ii. p. 199.-Fichte (Anweisung zum seligen Leben, p. 166, ss,) makes a distinction between the absolute and the empirical point of view. From the absolute point of view the eternal word

becomes, at all times, and in every one, flesh, in the same manner in which it became flesh in Christ, and manifests itself to every man who has a clear view of his unity with God. Fichte, indeed, admits that the knowledge of the absolute unity of the human existence with the divine (the profoundest knowledge to which man can attain), had not existed previous to the time of Christ; but he also imagines that the philosopher may not only discover these truths independently of Christianity, but also take a more comprehensive and clearer view of them, than has been transmitted by Christianity. On the one hand he professes to believe (p. 172) that all truly rational men will, to the end of time, render profound homage to this Jesus of Nazareth, and acknowledge the incomparable excellency of this highly exalted person with the greater humility the more they know themselves; though he also thinks (p. 172) that if Jesus were to return to our world, he would rest satisfied at finding Christianity established in the minds of men, without claiming adoration for himself. But on the other hand (p. 173), he maintains that it is the metaphysical alone, and not the historical, which will save a man (the latter only makes the thing intelligible). "If any one be truly united with God, it is altogether indifferent in what manner he has attained unto this state, and it would be a most useless and perverse occupation to waste much time in the recollection of the manner, instead of enjoying that union itself." -Schelling, Methode des akademischen Studiums, p. 175: "The highest sense for religion which expressed itself in Christian mysticism, regarded the mystery of nature, and that of the incarnation of God, as identical." Ibid., p. 192 "Theologians interpret the incarnation of God in Christ empirically, as if God assumed the nature of man at a certain moment of time. But it is impossible to attach any meaning to this idea, since God is eternally aloof from all time. Hence the incarnation of God is an incarnation from eternity. The man Christ forms in his historical appearance only the crown, and therefore also the beginning of that incarnation; for beginning with him, it was so to be continued that all his followers should be members of one and the same body of which he is the head. History testifies that God truly manifested himself first in Christ: for who that preceded him revealed the infinite in such a manner?" On the other hand, comp. pp. 194, 195, where he maintains that the numerous incarnations in which the East Indians believe, are more rational than the single incarnation of God taught by Christian missionaries; and p. 206: "Whether the writings of the New Testament are genuine or not, whether the narratives contained in them are. real and unadulterated facts, and whether their contents are in accordance with the idea of Christianity, or not, cannot affect the reality of that idea, inasmuch as it does not depend on this single phenomenon, but is universal and absolute." For further particulars, comp. Dorner, p. 339 ss.-Blasche (Ueber das Böse, p. 300) regards the matter rather from the historical point of view: ...." Christ is the representative of the acme to which the world-historical work of redemption had attained. The incarnation of God was completed in him. He has therefore the significance of a personal moral creator of the world" (p. 301). "He was the highest product of the universal moral creation in the history of the world; this higher creation became personal particularly in him" (p. 303).-Concerning the christological views of Hegel

(Religions Philosophie, vol. ii., p. 204 ss., especially p. 233-256), see Dorner, 1. c., p. 397 ss., and his remarks respecting them, p. 406 ss. According to Dorner it is difficult to decide whether the historical Christ (in the system of Hegel) possesses any specific dignity, or whether Hegel does not believe in the unity of the divine with the human in the person of Christ, merely as a means of comprehending it in himself? (Dorner, p. 414.) The adherents of the two schools of Hegel differ in their views concerning the nature of Christ. Some (as Marheineke, Rosenkranz, and Conradi, see Dorner, p. 366 ss.) endeavor to unite the historical Christ with the ideal. Others do not consider him as a purely mythical person, but as the accidental representative of a certain idea; this idea gave rise to the development of a body of myths, which were thrown around the name and person of Jesus. Thus Strauss, in his Leben Jesu, and in his Dogmatik, ii., p. 209 ss.t'

De Wette (comp. Dorner, p. 281 ss., who classes him with Fichte and Jacobi, but he ought rather to be compared with Herder), is not to be confounded with those who, rejecting the historical, attach importance only to the idea. On the contrary, he regards the historical Christ as the realized idea; although it must be confessed, his eye is rather turned toward the aspiring, subjective heart, seeking what may satisfy its wants, than to the investigating and argumentative intellect. He combats the mythico-speculative theory in decided terms; Religion und Theologie, p. 184. He was also the first who again treated, Christian ethics (which orthodox theologians had been accustomed to discuss in the most abstract manner), on the foundation of the person of Christ; comp. his Lehrbuch der christlichen Sittenlehre, 841 ss., § 53. See also his Vorlesungen über die Religion, Vorlesung 18: "All the rays of truth which came forth among men, are united in Christ, the light of the world. All the knowledge of the true and the good previous to his time is only a presentiment of that which he has revealed." Ibid., p. 444: "The personal character, life and death of Christ, and belief in him, form the centre of Christianity. The spirit of religion became personal in him, and, proceeding from him, exerted an influence upon the world which stood in need of a new religious life in order to regenerate it." Comp. his Kirchliche Dogmatik, § 63; Religion und Theologie, p. 115 ss.; Vorwurt zum Commentar des Matthaeus (1 edit., p. vii.); and the last chapter of his historical review of the narratives of the gospels (on John); the two latter are written

*Hegel rejected the rationalistic theory, p. 240: "If we regard Christ in the same light as Socrates, we regard him as a mere man, like the Mohammedans, who consider Christ to have been a messenger of God, in that more comprehensive sense in which all great men may be called ambassadors or messengers of God. If we merely say that Christ was a teacher of mankind, and a martyr for truth, we express ourselves neither from the Christian point of view, nor from that of true religion."—But compare what follows.

However much Jacobi differed from the speculative philosophers on theological points, he was equally indifferent as to the historical person of the Redeemer, and rested satisfied with subjective religious feelings, while they contented themselves with the speculative idea. See the words addressed to Claudius, in the introduction to this treatise: Von den göttlichen Dingen (reprinted in Strauss, Dogmatik, ii., p. 203). In this Herder forms a partial contrast with Jacobi, or rather a complement to him (as Jacobi writes to Claudius, so does Göthe to Lavater, only in stronger terms; see note 5.)